Miss. Gov. Denies Pardon for Black Veteran

I don’t get what the big deal would be for him to do this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060504/ap_on_re_us/mississippi_pardon

[i]Miss. Gov. Denies Pardon for Black Veteran By SHELIA BYRD, Associated Press Writer
Thu May 4, 6:33 PM ET

JACKSON, Miss. - Gov. Haley Barbour won’t grant a posthumous pardon to a black Korean War veteran who was wrongfully convicted in segregationist Mississippi after he tried to enroll in an all-white university.

Clyde Kennard was convicted of purchasing $25 worth of chicken feed he knew to be stolen in 1960 and sentenced to seven years in prison, but the only witness against him has recanted his testimony. Kennard died in 1963, after being released early because he had intestinal cancer.

Barbour agrees Kennard was wronged but says he won’t grant a pardon, despite calls for him to clear the man’s name…[/i]

So what if he’s innocent?

The guy is black for crying out loud. Doesn’t that count for something?

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
I don’t get what the big deal would be for him to do this.
[/quote]

In the instant case I can’t think of anything in particular.

As a systemic matter there may be worries about devoting resources to going back through criminal records to try to ascertain the truth of what they might assume to be a large rise in such claims on historic cases.

Or, in the alternative, perhaps there’s an annoying lawyer counseling them that making legal admissions to past wrongdoing might open them up to liability damages if they were sued, and that an action such as a pardon or an apology would be introduced as evidence against the state in such a case.

We really need some tort reform…

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I don’t get what the big deal would be for him to do this.

In the instant case I can’t think of anything in particular.

As a systemic matter there may be worries about devoting resources to going back through criminal records to try to ascertain the truth of what they might assume to be a large rise in such claims on historic cases.

Or, in the alternative, perhaps there’s an annoying lawyer counseling them that making legal admissions to past wrongdoing might open them up to liability damages if they were sued, and that an action such as a pardon or an apology would be introduced as evidence against the state in such a case.

We really need some tort reform…[/quote]

Tort reform will fix everything.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:

Tort reform will fix everything.[/quote]

Really, marmadogg, I hope you are attempting humor and not actually misrepresenting my point that badly…

The governer should grow some balls and issue the pardon if it is the right thing to do. Sometimes you have to ignore lawyers…

If needed, the state could pass legislation protecting themselves from lawsuits based on convictions and/or later pardons.

Coming at this from a purely political point of view, the gov. must know that in Mississippi this would hurt him more than help him. That’s a sad thing.

Hiding behind the “the gov. hasn’t pardoned any dead people” line doesn’t really cut it.

Of course, on the other hand, what difference does it make in the grand scheme of things if he does grant the pardon? The guy was still wrongly convicted, still spent time in jail, and is still dead. To me, everything that he spent his life fighting is better exposed if the governor refuses the pardon.

[quote]vroom wrote:
…Sometimes you have to ignore lawyers…
[/quote]

More often that we’d like to think actually…

Pardoning dead people is a waste of time.

It is feel good nonsense. It does not erase what happened to the poor guy but some politicians try to get mileage out of it.

I dont know the factors of the case. If he was a repeat offender, max penalty should be a year , and yes their was obviously grievous racism as evidenced by the penalty. For Shame. I think they should posthumously redice the sentance to 6 months because it is still a crime anyway. Its a difficult subject i would have a hard time deciding on this issue.

What do you think about this Vroom?

It’s a tough one.

Zap is right in one sense, pardoning dead people is a waste of time.

However, the feel good bullshit of a pardon could do good things for surviving family members and let the community know that the government stands up for the rights of all people at all times.

I mean, admitting a mistake, when the government is the one that went out and made it is not a meaningless thing entirely.

It would send a signal at the very least. I guess the governor doesn’t have the balls to do it, because it might be a political risk.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
I don’t get what the big deal would be for him to do this.

In the instant case I can’t think of anything in particular.

As a systemic matter there may be worries about devoting resources to going back through criminal records to try to ascertain the truth of what they might assume to be a large rise in such claims on historic cases.

Or, in the alternative, perhaps there’s an annoying lawyer counseling them that making legal admissions to past wrongdoing might open them up to liability damages if they were sued, and that an action such as a pardon or an apology would be introduced as evidence against the state in such a case.

We really need some tort reform…

Tort reform will fix everything.[/quote]

mmmmmm tort aghaghghghhhh

[quote]vroom wrote:
It’s a tough one.

Zap is right in one sense, pardoning dead people is a waste of time.

However, the feel good bullshit of a pardon could do good things for surviving family members and let the community know that the government stands up for the rights of all people at all times.

[/quote]

hahhaahhaa thats a good one. where do you come up with these? they’re great.

I both agree and disagree with Zap, likewise with vroom.

Yeah, pardoning dead people is pretty much a giant waste of time in the sense that it means absolutely nothing for the guy who’s dead.

On the other hand, and perhaps pardoning is not the best way to do this, it does show that the government stands up for what is right. But then again, maybe pardoning IS the best way to show it.

So the question is then one of the Mississippi government NOW, as is. Has it remained rooted in racism, or has it outgrown it?

I think Mississippi has some serious racial issues. They would be better served by focusing on the living.